Talk:Horatius
NGC 434 is the Horatian group of stars. The Horatian system was a part of this group. How can we separate the two? – AT2Howell 01:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC) :Sounds pretty simple -- NGC 434 sounds like a galactic star group or cluster and it can contain other stars within itself. Did you try Googling this, or is that too difficult for you, not in your notes, etc...? -- Captain MKB 18:53, April 20, 2010 (UTC) Only took you 2 years to answer that one. Good turn around time. – AT2Howell 18:57, April 20, 2010 (UTC) :That's about as long as it would have taken you to learn how to use Google, right? It was a relatively new thing in 1998, i know... :Or possibly, you disagree with me in my assupmtion that it wasn't "best" for the wiki for me to follow you around explaining simple things to you after it became apparent you weren't willing to work as a team with anyone else here? -- Captain MKB 19:08, April 20, 2010 (UTC) Suddenly dropping the "system" There Capt goes again, deciding what is 'best' for the wiki. Thankfully, he's the king of the wiki and doesn't have to discuss things like this with anyone. – AT2Howell 18:37, April 20, 2010 (UTC) :You know, it's funny how ignorant you are! Didn't you notice the name of the book is "Mission to Horatius" -- this establishes the system can be called "Horatius" (or else the book would have been called "Mission to Horatius System", right?) :Let me guess -- you didn't take this down in your notes? :By the way, this isn't a new decision -- i've been doing this for years, but I guess you haven't been paying close attention. Stellar! -- Captain MKB 18:53, April 20, 2010 (UTC) I've spent 3 years putting "system" on there. We had a discussion on it, as to whether it was "system" or "System". You suddenly arbitrarily decide that "system" is an unessesary word and we have to do as you say. Doesn't that about sum it all up? – AT2Howell 18:57, April 20, 2010 (UTC) :No, it doesn't. :If you've ever looked at the "move log" you'd have seen me correcting these over the past 3 years, to use the simplest variation of the term, when possible, and to consolidate individual stars with their systems as one article, as any star that has another object associated with it is technically a system, and creating a separate article for each one of those would be ridiculous. :using "System" is an unnecessary capitalization, as a great deal of works use the lowercase, even though some sources use the uppercase. On wikis, defaulting to lowercase is usually the best way because you'll catch more searches. :using "system" is correct as a disambiguation -- for example, if there are more than one thing named "Titan", you can add "system" to the end to show the difference between the "Titan system" and an unrelated topic like "Titans of mythology", "USS Titan" or "Titan, the moon". However, the presence of the word "system" has never been required. :The presence of the word "system" is often left out in our source material. People say "going to Alpha Centauri" or "going to 40 Eridani" more often than they say "going to the Alpha Centauri star system" or "going to the 40 Eridani star system", so these variations exist and are valid. -- Captain MKB 19:06, April 20, 2010 (UTC) Now Capt, I know your in a bit of a snit, so in the interest of galactic peace, I'll just let it go. You get that way sometimes, usually when you realize you're wrong about something. I'll just let it go. You like being king of the wiki, so I'll let you do that. I like entering references, so I'll do that. to the self-proclaimed king, and exits – AT2Howell 19:33, April 20, 2010 (UTC) :Stop being a snot. I haven't proclaimed anything, but if I ever did, trust me, you'd know. I'm a little confused that you think i'm 'wrong' about this, since it's a simple edit naming convention that you've decided to taunt me about. Other users agree with this, and help me in this. You can't even find an acceptable way to question it, going right ahead and singling me out in a childish manner. Get over yourself. -- Captain MKB 03:11, April 21, 2010 (UTC)